Whither DotAfrica amidst Confusion, Promiscuity and many Strange Bed-fellows

Since DotConnectAfrica (DCA) proposed the DotAfrica Initiative and commenced an active global promotional campaign for it that resulted in winning key endorsements mostly notably from the African Union (AU) Commission in 2009; DCA, despite the initial successes recorded, has had to also contend with numerous detractors and opponents, who, in their adversarial posturing, constitute a motley crew of strange bed-fellows that DCA now has to confront – unfortunately!

Ironically, one thing common to these strange bed-fellows – namely dotafrica.org, AfTLD and ARC – is their promiscuity: they are so related to one another; have not proposed the DotAfrica Initiative and have also expended zero effort in promoting it, but even so, want to take it over by any means necessary – by hook or crook!   By their shenanigans, they have zealously tried to undermine DCA’s Yes to DotAfrica campaign.
_________________________________________________________________
I – Dotafrica.org: The failure of Dotafrica.org as an Inchoate Idea

Dotafrica.org was registered in the name of Dr.Nii Quaynor, a member of the AU Task Force on DotAfrica whose conflicting interests are well-known, but when the proposer could not build a broad-based following to support the idea, the DotAfrica.org Organization, as proposed could not be registered; and as such was never registered and thus remained a rudimentary proposal on a web site (http://www.dotafrica.org/) never to see the light of day.

a) This however has not stopped it from shamelessly engaging in pretentious and tendentious posturing whilst portraying itself as a prospective applicant to ICANN for DotAfrica, even though its main proponent has in secret, entirely abandoned the ‘dotafrica.org’ idea and ‘sold out’ to rent-seeking opportunists. DotAfrica.org has already been exposed as a Ghanaian-sponsored agenda that has proved to be a colossal fiasco.

b) The proponents of DotAfrica.org continue to engage in needless brinkmanship and ‘political grandstanding’ simply to remain relevant in the DotAfrica process even though it is clear to serious analysts and careful observers that dotafrica.org is no longer a serious contender; against the backdrop that the owner of dotafrica.org has already and openly given a vote of confidence to AfTLD.

c) The fact that the domain name dotafrica.org was registered in 2002 whilst the proposal published on its website, a solid 5 years after the fact in 2007, following DCA commencement of the dotafrica initiative, only shows the original intentions behind the registration of the domain name was simply for ‘ cyber-squatting/rent-seeking intentions’ and nothing to do with the actual DotAfrica Initiative as presently proposed and modeled under the aegis of the on-going ICANN program for the introduction of new gTLDs.

d) AfTLD’s interest in DotAfrica only became manifest when the proponents of the inchoate dotafrica.org discovered the dotafrica.org proposal was becoming moribund, and thought that AfTLD would provide them a foothold to gain secret control of DotAfrica.  This explains how the AU Task Force members disingenuously got the AfTLD involved willy-nilly in DotAfrica in order to undermine DCA’s endorsement and standing with the African Union Commission.
______________________________________________________________
II – AFTLD
a)  AfTLD is a Private Company that is NOT owned by African ccTLDs
The involvement of AfTLD in DotAfrica has proved to be the most dangerous, and of the most sinister motivation, in terms of its claims that the AfTLD represents African country code Top Level Domains (ccTLDs) and as such, is best positioned to operate DotAfrica. In spite of this hollow claim, AfTLd’s position remains highly tenuous and unsustainable.

b) But what is (or who is) exactly the AfTLD?
AfTLD is actually a private company limited by guarantee (‘African Top Level Domains Limited’). Internet Direct Limited and Mr. Kwok Vee Kong Kem Yen are both the initial shareholder and initial director of AFTLD Limited.   Internet Direct Limited in turn is owned 95 per cent by Mr. Kwok Kem Yen Kwok Vee Kong  and 5 per cent by Kwok Kem Yen Ah Chook. Internet Direct Limited is owned by the Mauritius ccTLD, as such, is the Mauritius Registry according to information available from the Mauritius ccTLD Network Information Centre (See http://www.register.mu) and also verified by DCA sources.  The AfTLD Constitution provides for the admission to membership of organizations which manage ISO 3166 country code Top Level Domains delegated by ICANN.

Therefore, in terms of actual corporate ownership, AFTLD Limited is owned by Mr. Kwok Vee Kong Kem Yen, (also an advisor to the AU Taskforce) and NOT by the association of ccTLDs in Africa as an umbrella group.  This is the simple truth. Therefore, any statement that AfTLD is owned by, or represents African ccTLD’s is indeed false, profoundly misleading and patently dishonest.

One only has to refer to the Constitution of AfTLD Limited. which is available on the AfTLD web site.  It is simply a treacherous lie based on a myth that presents a distorted view with the aim of giving false credentials to AfTLD before Internet Governance Authorities and governmental/inter-governmental stakeholders whilst confusing and misleading the so-called ‘African Internet Community’.

Therefore, AfTLD continues to represent the interests of a cabal that Mr. Kwok Vee Kong Kem Yen fronts for as an adviser. In attempting to buttress its status as a non-profit, Clause 5 of the AfTLD Limited Constitution states inter alia: “no part of the income or capital shall be transferred, directly or indirectly, to the members of the company, whether by way of dividend or bonus or otherwise in the form of profit.” The keywords are “no transfer of profit to members” since in truth, these members do not own AfTLD Limited, and if any ex gratia payments were to be made, for example by ARC to AfTLD, the payment would simply go to the actual owners of AfTLD as a private company and not to the African ccTLD members!

It is obvious that AfTLD uses the African ccTLDs to gain institutional credibility, but “swindles” the African ccTLDs out of any possible profits, simply because in reality they do not own AfTLD Limited! AfTLD is truly non-profit to its African ccTLD members!

c) Exploding the Myth that AfTLD Represents African ccTLDs
AfTLD has been portraying itself as representative of African ccTLDs in order to gain the sympathies and official support of the African Union and gain the undeserved following of the amorphous ‘African Internet Community’.  The public portrayal that AfTLD is owned by African ccTLDs is a spurious myth that has now been disproved! This deceit has gone on for too long, and was perpetrated by shameless miscreants to foster acts of illegality, whilst allowing a selfish cabal to take advantage of, and egregiously exploit, the gullibility of trusting African publics in these matters.

In a nutshell, the AfTLD leaders have been misleading the people that it claims to represent; not to talk of the existing ‘unholy alliance’ that has been uncovered between the proponents of DotAfrica.org, the AU Task Force on DotAfrica, the AfTLD and the upstart African Registry Consortium (ARC),
the last but not the least strange bed-fellow!
_____________________________________________________________
III – African Registry consortium (ARC)

The ARC will Fail because of Reckless Opportunism
a) DCA has already exposed the ARC for what it truly is  here but it seems the proponents of the ARC idea are continuing with their entirely profit-driven, opportunistic business plan.

b) Koffi Fabrice Djossou, supposedly a spokesperson and “founding member of ARC”, but who is really is NOT an ARC “founding member” going by the information available on ARC’s website; is actually well-known as an errand boy for the Cabal and Pierre Dandjinou, the prior Chair of AU Task Force, but is now attempting to take on the public face of the true owners of ARC, and was quoted in media saying:

“ARC is seeking the backing of the African Union, as the AU has also recognized the commercial and social benefits that the .africa domain may present.”

(See http://mybroadband.co.za/news/internet/31832-africa-domain-name-plans.html ).
c) Again, the motives of the ARC would appear confusing to the untrained eye.

Which one is it? 1) On one hand it claims on its web site to be soliciting an expression of interest from  AfTLD to enable it support and financially assist AfTLD’s bid to ICANN and in return, to channel monies back to the AfTLD (http://www.africanregistry.net/index.php - ”For the provision of a domain name registry solution to the African Top Level Domain Organisation (aftld) for purposes of preparing, submitting, funding and promoting a successful bid to ICANN for the dotafrica new gTLD”). 2) On the other hand, the ARC, according to Koffi Fabrice Djossou, publicly says that it intends to approach the AU directly http://www.business live.co.za). d) In any case, ARC’s position is unsustainable since the AfTLD has already traversed this route. Actually, ARC thought that the AfTLD was gaining the upper hand, hence it decided to openly pitch its tent with the AfTLD, but after discovering that the AfTLD has nothing to offer it in terms of ‘political opportunities’ in closely following the campaign of DCA on the DotAfrica issue, ARC has now decided to approach the AU directly. DCA’s position is that such overtures, if ever undertaken by ARC would prove very unsuccessful, and would be seriously be challenged on grounds of illegality. First, on what basis ?? would ARC approach the African Union Commission when it is already clear to one and all that ARC is an organization that had no legal establishment at the time the AU called for Expressions of Interest on DotAfrica? e) Also on their website http://www.africanregistry.net/content.php?contentID=21 ARC acknowledges that DotAfrica is better served by a “public-private partnership “multi-stakeholder”model  the same model that DCA proposed, and advocated long ago for DotAfrica and was endorsed for it by the African Union Commission. Therefore, ARC has not come up with anything new, and simply ‘copying’ and rehashing DCA’s proposals. ARC is now wasting its time running a ‘Stale Campaign’ which could be likened to a fool’s errand. Again, on what basis ?? would the AU now support ARC for the same model of what has been previously proposed by DCA - or which reason DCA already received endorsement for DotAfrica.   What would be the motive? ARC’s Faux Pas 1) The ARC should now openly admit its faux pas of “seeking an expression of interest” from the AfTLD only to make the belated discovery that it was barking up the wrong tree! This happens when one makes an opportunistic business decision that is not based on any enduring vision but driven entirely by rent-seeking motives! 2) DCA’s prediction is that the ARC would fail theatrically despite its vaunted connections to UniForum SA. The ARC is well-advised to immediately discontinue its dreadful intentions regarding DotAfrica. It would appear that the ARC hopes to take over the space that was previously occupied by the now largely discredited AfTLD. 3) The ARC had hoped that AfTLD will gain the upper hand from the AU even though it was clear from the outset that such an eventuality would have been entirely illegitimate. DCA had strongly argued and made a convincing case that the AfTLD was a beneficiary of the illegality that was being actively promoted by some members of the AU Task Force Members on Dot Africa.

When it became clear that the AfTLD really had no ‘upper hand”, the same Task force members and their AfTLD cohorts instigated the establishment of the ARC and inveigled the upstart to become involved in DotAfrica thereby creating the confusion that now seems clear to interested impartial observers and analysts against the backdrop that the AU might actually apply directly for DotAfrica.

Whither DotAfrica amidst confusion, promiscuity and many strange bed-fellows?

Finally,

DCA calls upon its Pan-African constituency to completely reject these ‘strange-bedfellows’ and deny them every form of support on DotAfrica. The activities of these groups border on  treachery. On one hand they attempt to convince the AU to“lead and own” DotAfrica, but secretly, they commit a sell-out of DotAfrica to nouveau-riche venture capitalists and expose DotAfrica to the machinations of those who are adepts at strategizing on BEE opportunities and possible BEE-scamming risks!

The AU should therefore take heed and not provide any support to the ARC so as not to give official endorsement to a potential BEE scam.

DotAfrica should not be subjected to the whims and caprices of these groups. Africa and Africans deserve better.

The Cabal deceives by publicly advocating for the AU Commission, but behind the scenes set-up other arrangements to benefit themselves, thereby acting true to type for in truth: “There is no honor amongst thieves”

Say no to deception and misrepresentation! These groups should not be allowed to gain a foothold on DotAfrica!

Those who have not sown should not be allowed to reap!
                                                                                                          "The seed principle"
This is not only the African Way, but the Universal Way!

Say ”NO” to the DotAfrica CABAL Here...

Before Africa does

“brand.africa” let it do

“goodgovernance.africa”

Read More

Email Us africadomainnames@gmail.com